Can someone from IP Expert verify the initial possible error here?
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Brian Stamper <[email protected]>wrote: > Hey Kyle, > Hows it going! This is why I'm trying to be more detailed with things. My > biggest issue seems to be comprehension of the requirements in the > question. I haven't ever read between the lines well or found a needle in > a haystack and it appears to me many of the questions are like that. The > instructor for the bootcamp I went to explained it as "The questions have > depth to them". So learning to pick out what is being asked is my > biggest challenge. Some of these errors in the workbook are actually good > for me compiled with my lab not being identical to the IPExpert topology. > Taking the time to understand the technology and having to "migrate" the > solution into my lab seems to be a big help. The only issue is is making > sure I have support to clarify the errors when I find them as without that > I start to second guess myself. > Thanks, > Brian > > > On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Brian Stamper <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Its in the workbook and from what I've heard there is quite a bit of >> route/switch with basic Routing with protocols/static routes, QOS, Spanning >> Tree, port security, Multicast, etc. I am just asking for clarification on >> this particular Lab 1.3 that appears to have an error. Hopefully one of >> the IPExpert people can clarify. >> >> >> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Stefan Angerer <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Yes …**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Regards**** >>> >>> Stefan**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *Von:* [email protected] [mailto: >>> [email protected]] *Im Auftrag von *alan blake >>> *Gesendet:* Samstag, 16. Februar 2013 09:39 >>> *An:* Brian Stamper >>> *Cc:* [email protected] >>> *Betreff:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Wireless] IPExpert Lab 1.3**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Should the level of trouble shooting be geared around wireless >>> misconfiguration rather than r&s? Is this common to the lab to troubleshoot >>> spanning tree in this detail? **** >>> >>> On 15 Feb 2013 22:13, "Brian Stamper" <[email protected]> wrote:** >>> ** >>> >>> I think I found an error in this Lab. **** >>> >>> I believe the cost for the even vlans is applied to the wrong interface. >>> In order to make Cat3 prefer a route through Cat1 to the root Cat2 for >>> even vlans we'd have to apply the cost to Fa 0/20 on Cat3. The workbook >>> and final configs have it on Fa0/22 on cat 3 (pointing the wrong way). The >>> cost on the path out of Fa0/22 for the even vlans is already 31 where the >>> cost out Fa0/20 is 19 as its directly connected. We would need to raise it >>> on Fa0/20 to 32 and not on Fa0/22. Is there someone who can confirm this >>> for me. >>> -- **** >>> >>> Thanks,**** >>> >>> Brian Stamper CCNP Wireless, VCP**** >>> >>> 5157243424**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>> please visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out >>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com**** >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Brian Stamper CCNP Wireless, VCP >> 5157243424 >> >> > > > -- > Thanks, > Brian Stamper CCNP Wireless, VCP > 5157243424 > > -- Thanks, Brian Stamper CCNP Wireless, VCP 5157243424
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
